An Embarrassingly Simple Graph Heuristic Reveals Shortcut-Solvable Benchmarks for Sequential Recommendation
Abstract
Sequential recommendation is a central task in recommender systems, and recent research has increasingly shifted toward generative recommenders that leverage both sequential patterns and semantic item information. However, these methods are often evaluated on a small set of widely used benchmarks. This raises a natural question: do these benchmarks actually require the advanced modeling capabilities of modern generative recommenders? We conduct a benchmark audit using an intentionally simple graph heuristic: starting from only the most recent one or two interacted items, it retrieves candidates from a few-hop item-transition graph and ranks them with item-feature similarity. Surprisingly, despite its simplicity, this heuristic matches or outperforms a broad set of modern baselines on a variety of popular sequential recommendation benchmarks. For example, it achieves relative NDCG@10 improvements of 38.10\% and 44.18\% over the best competing baseline on the widely used Amazon Review Sports and CDs datasets, respectively. We further show that this phenomenon is not merely an artifact of a particular heuristic, but reflects shortcut solvability in existing benchmarks. Specifically, we identify three potential shortcut structures that could make next-item prediction easier than expected: low-branching local transition structure, feature-smooth transitions, and limited dependence on long user histories. These shortcuts do not need to appear simultaneously. Depending on the dataset, even one or two strong shortcut signals can make simple local retrieval highly competitive, while weakening the relevant signals allows more sophisticated models to show clearer benefits. Our broader evaluation across 14 diverse datasets further shows that model rankings change substantially with dataset properties, while the simple graph heuristic remains competitive on 10 out of 14 datasets. These findings suggest that strong performance on several standard sequential recommendation benchmarks may not faithfully reflect whether recent methods achieve the advanced modeling capabilities they aim to demonstrate. Rather than treating datasets as interchangeable leaderboards, we argue for more careful dataset selection and dataset-level diagnostic analysis when using benchmarks to support claims about the benefits of new recommendation models.